Speculation: 2019-2020 Sharks Roster Discussion Part 9

[Gecklund]

There were like six of them last year. Sure most of them are of little consequence but it does happen and it's not always with a premium.

And Toffoli would be of big consequence. I don’t remember a single trade where the teams hate each other as much as LA and SJ that meant anything. It would cost other teams the equivalent of a 2nd+prospect, it would cost us a 1st+same level prospect or 2nd+prospect we don’t want to give up. Toffoli isn’t worth that. Galchenyuk would cost us an expendable piece that we don’t need and will probably be gone at the end of the year anyway. Which would you rather pay?

 

[Pinkfloyd]

And Toffoli would be of big consequence. I don’t remember a single trade where the teams hate each other as much as LA and SJ that meant anything. It would cost other teams the equivalent of a 2nd+prospect, it would cost us a 1st+same level prospect or 2nd+prospect we don’t want to give up. Toffoli isn’t worth that. Galchenyuk would cost us an expendable piece that we don’t need and will probably be gone at the end of the year anyway. Which would you rather pay?

Is it though? Toffoli is a player somewhere between Donskoi and Nyquist level in play quality. I also don't see it as much of a difference between the Toffoli potential acquisition and the Wild-Preds deal with Fiala for Granlund. If the Kings are renting Toffoli and aren't planning on re-signing Toffoli, they're going to rent him to the best offer available. Toffoli isn't special and isn't something they can't get elsewhere so if the Kings are going to put a premium on the Sharks for him that they wouldn't for non-divisional teams, that's their own stupid choice to make. As for your unnecessary false choice, I'd rather go with what we have than pay a 1st plus for Toffoli when he's worse than Nyquist and we got him for cheaper or pay even just future considerations for Galchenyuk. Galchenyuk is awful and is to be avoided.

 

[hohosaregood]

With Montreal falling to pieces, I'd be interested in Danault and/or Armia.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

With Montreal falling to pieces, I'd be interested in Danault and/or Armia.

I don't think Montreal is going to move them. They seem to be far from the problem there and aren't expiring contracts.

 

[one2gamble]

Is it though? Toffoli is a player somewhere between Donskoi and Nyquist level in play quality. I also don't see it as much of a difference between the Toffoli potential acquisition and the Wild-Preds deal with Fiala for Granlund. If the Kings are renting Toffoli and aren't planning on re-signing Toffoli, they're going to rent him to the best offer available. Toffoli isn't special and isn't something they can't get elsewhere so if the Kings are going to put a premium on the Sharks for him that they wouldn't for non-divisional teams, that's their own stupid choice to make. As for your unnecessary false choice, I'd rather go with what we have than pay a 1st plus for Toffoli when he's worse than Nyquist and we got him for cheaper or pay even just future considerations for Galchenyuk. Galchenyuk is awful and is to be avoided.

I feel like you could get Toffoli for like a third and a meh prospect at this point

 

[TheWayToRefJose]

With Montreal falling to pieces, I'd be interested in Danault and/or Armia.

Armia would be a legit add, but I can't see them parting with him easily.

 

[Gecklund]

I feel like you could get Toffoli for like a third and a meh prospect at this point

You could not. I don’t think anyone but you feels that way.

Armia would be a legit add, but I can't see them parting with him easily.

Hilarious how people want Armia when he has had a single semi okay season. So we are willing to spend 2.6M in cap on a player with a career high of 29 points for two seasons but not an extra 1.5M on a player with a career high of 56 and can play all three forward positions and is younger?

 

[hohosaregood]

You could not. I don’t think anyone but you feels that way.


Hilarious how people want Armia when he has had a single semi okay season. So we are willing to spend 2.6M in cap on a player with a career high of 29 points for two seasons but not an extra 1.5M on a player with a career high of 56 and can play all three forward positions and is younger?

Or just throwing out other options ya know.

 

[Gecklund]

Or just throwing out other options ya know.

We can’t really afford other options. Who out there is realistically available that won’t cost a first?

 

[Pistol Pete]

The GM of the Kings is a former Sharks captain that was signed as a FA by the current Sharks GM. There has been no animosity shown between the two. The Sharks-Kings rivalry is a thing of the past. The Sharks (and most likely every other Pacific team) hates Vegas. The Kings have become a perennial lotto team.

There is no reason why Rob Blake would charge Doug Wilson a higher price for an underwhelming, pending FA, in Toffoli. Blake’s job is to rebuild the Kings, not to deny the Sharks.

 

[HeiHouHauki]

Hilarious how people want Armia when he has had a single semi okay season. So we are willing to spend 2.6M in cap on a player with a career high of 29 points for two seasons but not an extra 1.5M on a player with a career high of 56 and can play all three forward positions and is younger?

Armia was 'offense first' type a guy when he came to Buffalo from Ässät. Many said he was lazy and out of shape when he left from Finland. The reasons why he didnt succeeded at Buffalo. Then he went to Winnipeg where his work ethic to working out and play the defense/whitout the puck was jammed into his head. He was great bottom6 player at Jets playing shorthanded and delivering secondary scoring with talent which he always had on him. Jets fans were for reason broken when the team had to let go of Armia because of circumstances.
And now in Habs Armia has showed he can be the top6 player who delivers and can play defense, all-around winger with size and skill.

Galchenyuk has played top6 at almost entire career, mostly 'cause that time Habs wasnt deep and they hoped for long time him breaking to star players/be the center. He had one good season and time has pasted many years from that. Maded some points but not closely enough to get free-pass of his weaknesses.

Armia's career has been going up since he was traded to Jets. Galchenyuk career has been going down since 15-16 season. Got traded couple times after that and new home to the next season is very likely.

I think there is facts that Armia is so much better add to team than Galchenyuk, and the difference gets even bigger when thinking about playoff games. Just watching what kind of profiles the players are. There is so much more than career points.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Hilarious how people want Armia when he has had a single semi okay season. So we are willing to spend 2.6M in cap on a player with a career high of 29 points for two seasons but not an extra 1.5M on a player with a career high of 56 and can play all three forward positions and is younger?

Galchenyuk has only one season where he was on the positive side of the xG%. He just isn't any good. Armia, on the other hand, has been on the positive side of that for the past two seasons on top of him currently being on the positive side of that this year even with Montreal's swoon. While I think Armia would be a solid add, I have my doubts of his availability. If Galchenyuk showed at any point beyond that one good season that he had that he can be that player with regularity, he'd be an interesting acquisition. Problem is that he has never shown that since that season. Even with seasons that are productive from a points perspective, he consistently gives up more on the defensive end that he's a net negative player.

I think there are going to be a plethora of wingers available at the deadline with guys like Kreider or Toffoli or Grimaldi or Namestnikov or whomever. Some players simply aren't worth adding at any cost because they're showing themselves to be net negative players. Galchenyuk is one of those guys.

 

[Gecklund]

Galchenyuk has only one season where he was on the positive side of the xG%. He just isn't any good. Armia, on the other hand, has been on the positive side of that for the past two seasons on top of him currently being on the positive side of that this year even with Montreal's swoon. While I think Armia would be a solid add, I have my doubts of his availability. If Galchenyuk showed at any point beyond that one good season that he had that he can be that player with regularity, he'd be an interesting acquisition. Problem is that he has never shown that since that season. Even with seasons that are productive from a points perspective, he consistently gives up more on the defensive end that he's a net negative player.

I think there are going to be a plethora of wingers available at the deadline with guys like Kreider or Toffoli or Grimaldi or Namestnikov or whomever. Some players simply aren't worth adding at any cost because they're showing themselves to be net negative players. Galchenyuk is one of those guys.

Galchenyuk’s career low in points was his rookie year. He had 27 and only played 48 games. I don’t care what your advanced stats say when the numbers are this big of a difference. It’s one thing to use advanced stats to compare players with similar points. It’s useless when one player regularly scores 20 more points a year. If Galchenyuk hasn’t shown enough, Armia sure as hell hasn’t shown enough. Grimaldi is no better than what we have and the rest of the guys mentioned would cost too much.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Galchenyuk’s career low in points was his rookie year. He had 27 and only played 48 games. I don’t care what your advanced stats say when the numbers are this big of a difference. It’s one thing to use advanced stats to compare players with similar points. It’s useless when one player regularly scores 20 more points a year. If Galchenyuk hasn’t shown enough, Armia sure as hell hasn’t shown enough. Grimaldi is no better than what we have and the rest of the guys mentioned would cost too much.

It doesn't matter if he scores 60-70 points a year if he's giving up 70-80 points the other way. Armia and Grimaldi may not produce as many points as Galchenyuk but they give up a hell of a lot less on the other end than Galchenyuk. The point of the game isn't how many goals you scored on its own nor is it how many goals you give up on its own. The point of the game is goal differential and being on the positive side of the ledger. Galchenyuk is consistently on the wrong side of the ledger in terms of goals, shots, chances, and high danger chances.

 

[Gecklund]

It doesn't matter if he scores 60-70 points a year if he's giving up 70-80 points the other way. Armia and Grimaldi may not produce as many points as Galchenyuk but they give up a hell of a lot less on the other end than Galchenyuk. The point of the game isn't how many goals you scored on its own nor is it how many goals you give up on its own. The point of the game is goal differential and being on the positive side of the ledger. Galchenyuk is consistently on the wrong side of the ledger in terms of goals, shots, chances, and high danger chances.

That’s cause Armia and Grimaldi are playing against 4th liners (cause that’s what they are) while Galchenyuk is at worst a top 6 forward playing against other top 6 forwards.

 

[hohosaregood]

That’s cause Armia and Grimaldi are playing against 4th liners (cause that’s what they are) while Galchenyuk is at worst a top 6 forward playing against other top 6 forwards.

I don't think that's true for Galchenyuk. He's getting the 12th most 5v5 ice time in Pittsburgh right now which would be like 3rd/4th line minutes. At all strengths, he's still only 11th.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

That’s cause Armia and Grimaldi are playing against 4th liners (cause that’s what they are) while Galchenyuk is at worst a top 6 forward playing against other top 6 forwards.

When Crosby is in their lineup, Galchenyuk tends to be on their 3rd line and still gives up more than he produces. Armia has been pretty steadily a 3rd liner since solidifying himself in Winnipeg. Grimaldi certainly has been predominantly a 4th liner and potentially moving up now. However, even if Galchenyuk is at worst a top six forward, what good is that if he is consistently giving up more than what he creates? Galchenyuk's problem now is that he had been relegated to 3rd line duties with more regularity the past couple seasons and has shown the same sort of output of being in the negative. It doesn't matter how you slice it. Galchenyuk is a net negative player at this point. I'd rather have a marginally positive 3rd line level winger than a marginally negative 2nd/3rd line tweener who is showing no signs of improving where his shortcomings are.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

That’s cause Armia and Grimaldi are playing against 4th liners (cause that’s what they are) while Galchenyuk is at worst a top 6 forward playing against other top 6 forwards.

Did you ever consider that in this oversimplified scenario, Galchenyuk is also playing with other top-6 forwards, while Armia and Grimaldi are playing with other 4th line forwards?

 

[Doctor Soraluce]

You could not. I don’t think anyone but you feels that way.


Hilarious how people want Armia when he has had a single semi okay season. So we are willing to spend 2.6M in cap on a player with a career high of 29 points for two seasons but not an extra 1.5M on a player with a career high of 56 and can play all three forward positions and is younger?

At most Toffolie nets a 2nd and a 2nd tier prospect. Top line players get 1st round picks. He is not that.

 

[WTFetus]

The GM of the Kings is a former Sharks captain that was signed as a FA by the current Sharks GM. There has been no animosity shown between the two. The Sharks-Kings rivalry is a thing of the past. The Sharks (and most likely every other Pacific team) hates Vegas. The Kings have become a perennial lotto team.

There is no reason why Rob Blake would charge Doug Wilson a higher price for an underwhelming, pending FA, in Toffoli. Blake’s job is to rebuild the Kings, not to deny the Sharks.

I don't think the issue is asking a higher price because they are in the same division. It's more that other teams can offer similar to what the Kings would be looking for, and if all things are equal, they'd of course rather trade him outside the division/conference.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Galchenyuk has only one season where he was on the positive side of the xG%. He just isn't any good. Armia, on the other hand, has been on the positive side of that for the past two seasons on top of him currently being on the positive side of that this year even with Montreal's swoon. While I think Armia would be a solid add, I have my doubts of his availability. If Galchenyuk showed at any point beyond that one good season that he had that he can be that player with regularity, he'd be an interesting acquisition. Problem is that he has never shown that since that season. Even with seasons that are productive from a points perspective, he consistently gives up more on the defensive end that he's a net negative player.

I think there are going to be a plethora of wingers available at the deadline with guys like Kreider or Toffoli or Grimaldi or Namestnikov or whomever. Some players simply aren't worth adding at any cost because they're showing themselves to be net negative players. Galchenyuk is one of those guys.

If you care about staying on the positive side of the xG%, you probably shouldn't advocate for trading Dillon for top-6 help.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I don't think the issue is asking a higher price because they are in the same division. It's more that other teams can offer similar to what the Kings would be looking for, and if all things are equal, they'd of course rather trade him outside the division/conference.

I think that would be accurate for a player with term. For a rental though, I think that goes away. The only thing that makes me say otherwise is the old Sharks/Ducks trade where DW said as much but DW is known to lie as well. lol

 

[Pinkfloyd]

If you care about staying on the positive side of the xG%, you probably shouldn't advocate for trading Dillon for top-6 help.

It doesn't apply universally but if I'm looking at outside help, I'm going through all the metrics to see what would help for a position we're seeking. It's hard to legitimately credit Dillon for his xG% given the things in his favor here.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

It doesn't apply universally but if I'm looking at outside help, I'm going through all the metrics to see what would help for a position we're seeking. It's hard to legitimately credit Dillon for his xG% given the things in his favor here.

I have never seen you actually substantiate what things are so far in Dillon's favor that make it hard to legitimately credit him for this:

Evolving Hockey's RAPM regression model which accounts for the things that could be in his favor (teammates, competition, deployment, etc.) and isolates a player's impact still gives him plenty of credit for his impact on xG; he is the only Sharks D with a positive per-minute impact on expected goal shares.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I have never seen you actually substantiate what things are so far in Dillon's favor that make it hard to legitimately credit him for this:

View attachment 286109

Evolving Hockey's RAPM regression model which accounts for the things that could be in his favor (teammates, competition, deployment, etc.) and isolates a player's impact still gives him plenty of credit for his impact on xG; he is the only Sharks D with a positive per-minute impact on expected goal shares.

View attachment 286117

It's a lot of the eye test. When he is out there, who is the guy making the plays? What exactly do you honestly think he is doing to produce those numbers? The things that I have criticized him over are not minority opinions. He is defensively suspect most of the time and it is exposed more whenever he sees an increase in ice time and quality of opponents. And then the reality is that when you look at the roster outlook moving forward, he is the odd man out at the end of the day and the most replaceable with what we have internally right now.